Rice's public appearances negated claim of privilege

You couldn't help but notice national security adviser Condoleezza Rice on Sunday. She was on just about every television talk show, blasting Richard Clarke, former head of the National Security Council's counterterrorism unit in the Bush administration, for contending that the White House bears some responsibility for the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on America's mainland.
Yet, when it came to testifying under oath and in public before the 9/11 commission investigating the deadly acts by Al-Qaida that claimed more than 3,000 lives, the administration initially invoked executive privilege. Rice would be willing to meet with commission members behind closed doors, as she has done previously, for a discussion about Clarke's sworn testimony last week, administration officials said, but that's as far as she would go.
Late this morning, however, in the midst of growing political pressure from Republicans and Democrats, the White House agreed to Rice's public testimony.
We applaud the administration's change of heart because we strongly believe the American people have a right to all the facts surrounding the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The key question that must be answered is this: How did the Bush White House react to warnings about possible terrorist attacks against the United States in the months leading up to 9/11?
The question is important because Clarke, who also served in the Clinton administration, has written a book, "Against All Enemies," that claims the Bush administration was preoccupied with Iraq and Saddam Hussein and thus failed to pay attention to Al-Qaida and its leader, Osama bin Laden.
He elaborated on those claims during his appearance before the 9/11 commission and in interviews with reporters.
Standing moment
Rice took to the airwaves to reject Clarke's claims, but over the weekend made it clear that the administration was not willing to have her testify before the commission in public.
"There is a long-standing principle that sitting national security advisers do not testify before the Congress," Rice said during one of her nationally broadcast television appearances. Aside from the fact that some of her predecessors have appeared before Congressional committees, the 9/11 commission is not part of Congress. Indeed, it was the Republican president who appointed Republican Thomas H. Kean to chair the bipartisan panel.
It is instructive that the White House's executive privilege argument did not impress Kean or other Republican members of the commission. There was unanimous agreement that Rice should offer public sworn testimony about the actions taken by the administration with regard to Al-Qaida prior to the Sept. 11 attacks.
Bush has characterized that fateful day as the defining moment in America's history and has insisted that extraordinary measures, such as the passage of the Patriot Act, are needed to prevent another terrorist attack from taking place in this country. The president has shown a willingness to trample on constitutionally protected rights in the name of fighting terrorism, yet he and his national security adviser sought to hide behind the Constitution on the issue of her testifying before the 9/11 commission.